Global Mountain Biodiversity Assessment

Global Mountain Biodiversity Assessment
Name	Global Mountain Biodiversity Assessment
Formation	2002
Type	Scientific assessment
Headquarters	Bern
Parent organization	International Union for Conservation of Nature
Region served	Global

Contents

Global Mountain Biodiversity Assessment The Global Mountain Biodiversity Assessment was an international scientific initiative that synthesized knowledge on mountain biodiversity across major ranges, informing policy processes such as the Convention on Biological Diversity, the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, and the United Nations Environment Programme. Initiated by researchers linked to institutions including the International Union for Conservation of Nature, the Swiss Academy of Sciences, and the Global Mountain Biodiversity Assessment Secretariat, the project interfaced with programs such as the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, the World Conservation Strategy, and the Mountain Partnership.

Overview

The Assessment convened specialists from mountain regions including the Himalayas, the Andes, the Rocky Mountains, the Alps, the Karakoram, the Tian Shan, the Atlas Mountains, the Great Dividing Range, and the Drakensberg to evaluate species richness, endemism, and ecosystem services relevant to stakeholders such as the Convention on Biological Diversity, the Ramsar Convention, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, and national agencies like the United States Fish and Wildlife Service and the European Commission. Drawing on collaborations with universities such as the University of Bern, the University of Cambridge, the University of California, Berkeley, the Australian National University, and research centres like the International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development and the Mountain Research Initiative, the Assessment produced syntheses used by policy bodies including the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the Global Environment Facility.

Methodologies combined field surveys, remote sensing, phylogenetics, and meta-analyses integrating datasets from contributors such as the Global Biodiversity Information Facility, the International Union for Conservation of Nature Red List, the World Database on Protected Areas, the Global Land Cover Facility, and regional monitoring networks like the Alpine Network of Protected Areas. Taxonomic expertise was drawn from botanical institutions such as the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, the Missouri Botanical Garden, and zoological collections including the Smithsonian Institution and the Natural History Museum, London while analytical frameworks referenced work by the Long-Term Ecological Research Network, the Society for Conservation Biology, and the International Union for Conservation of Nature Species Survival Commission.

The Assessment reported patterns of high endemism and species turnover associated with elevational gradients in ranges like the Himalayas, the Andes, and the Alps, linking outcomes to palaeoecological records from the Quaternary and genotype data from projects involving the European Molecular Biology Laboratory and the Smithsonian Institution. It highlighted mismatches between protected area coverage in regions such as Patagonia and the Carpathians and biodiversity hotspots identified by the Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund and the World Wide Fund for Nature. The analysis emphasized the role of mountains in provisioning services noted in assessments by the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

Drivers identified included climate change signals reported by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, land-use change documented in studies linked to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, invasive species incidents noted by the International Plant Protection Convention, pollution episodes recorded by the United Nations Environment Programme, and extractive pressures related to projects financed by institutions like the World Bank and the Asian Development Bank. The Assessment cited case evidence from events such as glacial retreat in the Himalayas, deforestation in the Amazon Basin, and mining impacts in the Andes, relating these to policy instruments like the Nagoya Protocol and the Aichi Biodiversity Targets.

Recommendations promoted expansion and connectivity of protected areas drawing on frameworks from the Convention on Biological Diversity and implementation guidance from the International Union for Conservation of Nature and the World Commission on Protected Areas, integration of indigenous and local knowledge as exemplified by collaborations with International Indian Treaty Council-linked groups and the World Indigenous Nations Higher Education Consortium, and ecosystem-based adaptation strategies aligned with guidance from the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Green Climate Fund. The Assessment informed national strategies in countries such as Nepal, Peru, Kenya, Switzerland, and Canada and influenced programs by the Global Environment Facility and non-governmental organizations including the Conservation International and the Wildlife Conservation Society.

Detailed regional syntheses covered the Himalayas with inputs from the International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development, the Andes drawing on research from the Pontifical Catholic University of Peru and the Universidad de Buenos Aires, the Alps with data from the Alpine Convention and the Eidgenössische Forschungsanstalt, the East African Highlands with studies linked to the Kenya Wildlife Service and the African Union, and the Central Asian ranges with contributions from the International Fund for Agricultural Development and the United Nations Development Programme. Each case linked biodiversity trends to regional policies such as national biodiversity strategies submitted under the Convention on Biological Diversity.

The Assessment urged enhanced monitoring using networks like the Global Biodiversity Information Facility and the Group on Earth Observations, greater integration of genomic tools from initiatives such as the Earth BioGenome Project and the Consortium for the Barcode of Life, improved socio-ecological research informed by the International Social Science Council and the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, and funding alignment with mechanisms including the Global Environment Facility and the Green Climate Fund. Priorities included transboundary conservation planning exemplified by the Mountain Partnership, scalable restoration initiatives paralleling the Bonn Challenge, and policy uptake via processes like the Convention on Biological Diversity post-2020 framework.